Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 17th Feb 2007 18:45 UTC, submitted by GhePeU
X11, Window Managers David Reveman writes: "I'd like to get all of you updated on the compiz related things discussed at the X developer conference that was held last week. My talk was mainly focused on 'what's next' and how to get desktop compositing in X to the next level." He also discussed the fork: "I had the chance to talk to Quinn Storm from the beryl project during xdevconf. I would have hoped that the current situation with beryl could be improved but it seems like Quinn at least isn't interested in that. However, after talking to Quinn it's very clear to me that the fork was partially motivated by assumptions that were wrong."
Permalink for comment 214357
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
My recent experience
by sbergman27 on Mon 19th Feb 2007 14:16 UTC
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

Last weekend, I got a 3D desktop set up for a client of mine. I was using Fedora Core 6 and AIGLX, since that is what is included as standard in that distro.

I spent about six hours trying to get compiz to work right. I failed. Sometimes it would decorate windows, but most of the time it would just ignore them and they wouldn't even have a frame. I spent so much time Compiz keeps claiming that they are the more stable branch.

I gave up in disgust and installed Beryl. Worked like a charm. The config utilities are impressive. (Compiz's seem to be nonexistant, but I didn't really get far enough with it to look too hard for it.)

Just based upon my limited experience, it appears that Beryl is leaps and bounds ahead of Compiz.

I had similar feelings regarding my AIGLX experience vs an XGL experience I had while back.

With AIGLX, I have only one X server running. I can play 3D games. (XGL doesn't run 3D games unless you write a script to start yet a 3rd X server on another VT! What a kludge!)

AIGLX just seems *so* much cleaner. XGL felt like something Rube Goldberg might have designed.

It seems to me that these projects that Novell is going off and doing behind closed doors, intentionally short circuiting community peer review, are coming out half baked.

Just based upon what I have seen, if I were Quinn, I wouldn't be particularly interested in tying my project down by "joining forces" with Compiz.

I should clarify that I'm staying neutral with respect to the whole Novell political situation. (i.e. I hope this does not come off as senseless Novell bashing.)

But the evidence seems to be going against their arguments about the benefits of a "cathedral" development style.

Edited 2007-02-19 14:25

Reply Score: 3